Connors v. Target Automotive Group ... - Supreme Court of Ohio

[Cite as Connors v. Target Automotive Group, Inc., 2017-Ohio-652.]

Court of Appeals of Ohio

EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA

JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 104230

ERIN M. CONNORS

PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT AND CROSS-APPELLEE vs.

TARGET AUTOMOTIVE GROUP, INC.

DEFENDANT-APPELLEE AND CROSS-APPELLANT

JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED

Civil Appeal from the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas

Case No. CV-14-826479 BEFORE: Kilbane, P.J., Stewart, J., and S. Gallagher, J. RELEASED AND JOURNALIZED: February 23, 2017

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT CROSS-APPELLEE

Rosemary Taft-Milby Ronald I. Frederick James Wertheim Frederick & Berler L.L.C. 767 East 185th Street Cleveland, Ohio 44119

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE CROSS-APPELLANT

Mary Jo Hanson 55 Public Square Suite 1550 Cleveland, Ohio 44113

James P. Cullen James P. Cullen L.L.C., L.P.A. 55 Public Square Suite 1550 Cleveland, Ohio 44113

MARY EILEEN KILBANE, P.J.: {?1} Plaintiff-appellant, Erin Connors ("Connors"), appeals from the trial court's

order denying her motion for attorney fees after she was awarded damages in a consumer sales practices action against defendant-appellee, Target Automotive Group, Inc. ("Target Automotive"). Target Automotive cross-appeals, challenging the trial court's damages award. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm the damages award, but we reverse the trial court's denial of Connors's attorney fees and remand with instructions to conduct a hearing to determine the amount of attorney fees.

{?2} On July 2, 2013, Connors and her father Rory Connors ("Rory") went to Target Automotive in Bedford, Ohio, after seeing an advertisement for a 2011 Dodge Avenger in "excellent condition." Connors traded in her 2004 Dodge Stratus and purchased the Dodge Avenger for $14,975. Several weeks later, Connors began experiencing problems with the vehicle. She and Rory took it to North Olmsted Dodge and learned that it had been in an accident and had sustained extensive damage prior to the purchase. Connors returned the vehicle to Target Automotive for servicing but continued to experience problems with it.

{?3} On May 7, 2014, Connors filed a complaint against Target Automotive, alleging that Target Automotive failed to disclose the prior damage to the vehicle, falsely represented that it had performed repairs, and failed to provide Connors with an itemized

list of repairs.1 Connors set forth claims for violations of the Consumer Sales Practices Act ("CSPA") and fraud. The matter proceeded to trial before the court on August 25, 2015.

{?4} Connors testified that in June 2013, she was researching vehicles online and read an advertisement on AutoTrader for a 2011 Dodge Avenger in "excellent condition" that was for sale at Target Automotive. Connors and Rory went to Target Automotive to see the vehicle on June 29, 2013, and dealt with Massimo Condelli ("Condelli"). The vehicle had less than 36,000 miles on it and was less than three years old. Condelli informed them that the vehicle was still under warranty from Chrysler. Condelli also told them that the warranty was transferable to the purchaser. No written warranty was provided, however. Rory asked Condelli if the vehicle had ever been in an accident. In response, Condelli told them that when the vehicle had less than 100 miles on it, a truck that was transporting it was involved in a "fender bender" but this accident did not damage the Dodge Avenger. Condelli then gave them the third page of an AutoCheck Report listing this accident.

{?5} Connors and Rory test drove the car on local streets and Connors then agreed to purchase it for $14,975 plus tax. She made a $200 down payment, traded in her 2004 Dodge Stratus for $1,498, and obtained bank financing for the balance.

1Connors also alleged that Target Automotive failed to disclose that the vehicle had been used as a rental car; however, at trial, the parties stipulated that there was no evidence to support this claim, and it was dismissed with prejudice.

{?6} Connors further testified that a few weeks after she purchased the vehicle, she began experiencing difficulties with the car during highway travel. As a result, Connors and Rory brought the vehicle to North Olmsted Dodge for repairs. At that time, they learned that the vehicle had been in a "severe accident" that damaged the frame and other portions of the car. They observed that the undercarriage of the vehicle had dents, grass, and dirt. Technicians at North Olmsted Dodge gave Connors and Rory the following written description of the problems with the vehicle:

Vehicle has been damaged from front to rear. 1) Radiator core support. 2) Power steering cooler lines zip-tied and leaking. 3) Oil pan, trans pan, [are] dented and there [are] oil leaks[.] More diagnosis is required. 4) Frame and subframe [are] damaged in several areas. 5) Gas tank scraped but no sign of fuel leaks. * * * There is a confirmed rotational thumping noise * * *. We noted two rims show signs of damage and are possibly bent * * *. Vehicle does drift [and] lead right alignment inspection is required. {?7} Connors brought the car to Spitzer Dodge to obtain additional warranty information about the vehicle. Spitzer Dodge provided her with a CarFax Report indicating that the vehicle had actually been in two accidents that voided the manufacturer's warranty. Connors then returned the car to Target Automotive. Target Automotive agreed to make the repairs and kept the vehicle for a day or two to realign it. When it was returned to Connors, however, the same problems persisted.

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download